Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, in Sessions Case No. 28 of 1993 dated 4.4.1998. The respondent, Popat alias Balu Buva Jadhav, was acquitted of offences punishable under Sections 376 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution case was that on 6th January 1993, the victim, a 7-year-old girl, was playing near her school when the accused, wearing a black pant, white shirt, and black cap, lured her with a chalk stick, took her to the balcony of a cinema theatre, and committed sexual intercourse with her. He also threatened to kill her if she disclosed the matter. The victim complained of pain in her private parts to her grandmother the next day, leading to the registration of an FIR. The trial court acquitted the accused, and the State appealed. The High Court, after examining the evidence, noted that the victim (PW4) in her testimony stated that the person who committed the offence was a 'boy' and not the accused. The victim's grandmother (PW3) admitted that she did not know the accused prior to the incident and that the victim had not told her the name of the assailant. The medical evidence did not corroborate the prosecution case. The High Court held that the prosecution failed to establish the identity of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The testimony of the child witness lacked corroboration on material particulars. The trial court's view was a possible view, and the High Court found no perversity in the acquittal. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was confirmed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appeal against acquittal - Section 378(1) CrPC - Scope of interference - The High Court while hearing an appeal against acquittal must give due weight to the view of the trial court on credibility of witnesses, the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, and the right of the accused to benefit of doubt. (Para 2) B) Evidence Law - Child witness - Corroboration - Testimony of a child witness requires corroboration on material particulars to form the basis of conviction. (Para 5) C) Criminal Law - Rape - Section 376 IPC - Identity of accused - In a case of rape of a minor, the prosecution must prove the identity of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Failure to do so entitles the accused to acquittal. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court was perverse and liable to be set aside in appeal under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Baramati, in Sessions Case No. 28 of 1993 dated 4.4.1998 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Appeal against acquittal
- Section 378 CrPC
- presumption of innocence
- child witness
- corroboration
- identity of accused
- benefit of doubt
